Re: problem with recent drafts on tools.ietf.org? {35440727}

Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 10 March 2021 18:24 UTC

Return-Path: <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 032743A150B for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 10:24:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.096
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.096 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id taeyeDwHNMX3 for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 10:24:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf1-x42f.google.com (mail-pf1-x42f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CBD43A150A for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 10:24:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf1-x42f.google.com with SMTP id q204so12561202pfq.10 for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 10:24:22 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:in-reply-to :date:cc:message-id:references:to; bh=q66432wHnYMQ4ZdaQRJ3Cv5R8wZesrXUq/kKhRCf6Ew=; b=rtHjS7vm1+XqwU9Q7ZrKN0zKe6cP5m3bd6xhfyKHzbhqPl6OYFtKyTdpdqjVuRDAaw Cc+phQ7jRjhzg2/DxVkk5rMYTZwJ+LuSL8+kfrri03PFLo6voDH8OAk6MROtxgS/zxzx Z0KvYMpLDc9VaMIwWb8RQ1Mgxdw+7QAhKxZQemEOmzJFdviwAVaTG+O8B56aJJY3eVms UWKf8AN7hygSwJtxAtipSieS21KLbzav/8xBkQG7ZNxQCs+h5wgl4uqKl81grnH1mGzX Mb/9ktB9lgvs0/OvegUf0mUL/4tsreQ9eOK73mowxfZbT98oByt2bNjrm416lElF3Zqq XqWA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :subject:in-reply-to:date:cc:message-id:references:to; bh=q66432wHnYMQ4ZdaQRJ3Cv5R8wZesrXUq/kKhRCf6Ew=; b=QEts8jBf10uP1sFla7KuB0tRL5lNDYDTlxxxk4HJOkjccK8Ek+SXKXNoy50g+74Yu2 snYKg1cVfKqi/LiIzF+FEd3kG3LSAr7yeptStj0wJH2tLNp6yzU5VHVsJ+y3C0U+OIuK Eml/nxeUrRUKocYZn41DwAwtOOiXMLTdMKmnxX7dMvWFD+qDxAtNAVSTRz7+T5hWIv2M EE7GAIbcF1JaE8RBo1wQUx7y2HpAFl1+igegTBt149t8HNQF6nfqcq1d2KaPbpUEzrOU 2z1Y40ycCFdmz9K+yWVG/GqVDR6uBIzzjGriaj3UsG/Nw8ljkucJHjBSMh9840MZxlfG npsQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531RpxJq9OYB0dbWrGBwc89D+eMXsfrC0amO7XzWL8q5KEbDqL5q esglOaRHux4r4+StyoY+v3E=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyn1mWzba4u/NjTNbcSjkqhMuDm/eJztWp2vPw8+mfUDzosP9ckxuftwWoVM3PNkQb8ujuS1w==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:7c56:: with SMTP id l22mr3727008pgn.204.1615400661167; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 10:24:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpclient.apple ([2600:8802:5800:567::1003]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s27sm203804pgk.77.2021.03.10.10.24.20 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 10 Mar 2021 10:24:20 -0800 (PST)
From: Fred Baker <fredbaker.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Google-Original-From: Fred Baker <FredBaker.IETF@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-83069793-A099-4B23-8EC9-229540644326
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: problem with recent drafts on tools.ietf.org? {35440727}
In-Reply-To: <CADaq8je8812RkEQ9EQkafcMxF9=gOOZW9iMPc_skbj_5Tr_8ig@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 10:24:19 -0800
Cc: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>, Working Chairs <wgchairs@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <81B4E212-8D8C-49C1-86D3-C8E6BDACE48F@gmail.com>
References: <CADaq8je8812RkEQ9EQkafcMxF9=gOOZW9iMPc_skbj_5Tr_8ig@mail.gmail.com>
To: David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18E5164h)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wgchairs/IYpk28GGsfixSRarck6Gn3buVTI>
X-BeenThere: wgchairs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/wgchairs/>
List-Post: <mailto:wgchairs@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 18:24:25 -0000

Thanks for clearing this up. I obviously forr, and repeated, some bad data.

I don’t blame you for discounting IETF lists. I’m back on it now, but dropped ietf@ after the Buenos Aires meeting. The meetings committee got a load of crap on that list for quite some time, and I had had enough.

Sent using a machine that autocorrects in interesting ways...

> On Mar 10, 2021, at 3:37 AM, David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> I believe it is the IETF Administration LLC Board of Directors. 
> 
>> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021, 6:17 AM Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com> wrote:
>> This is most disturbing.
>> 
>> Who is Jay’s boss?
>> 
>> Stewart
>> 
>> > On 10 Mar 2021, at 11:02, Henrik Levkowetz <henrik@levkowetz.com> wrote:
>> > 
>> > Hi Fred,
>> > 
>> > Someone alerted me to this.  I don't read any IETF lists any more, so
>> > needed the nudge:
>> > 
>> > On 2021-03-04 20:15, Fred Baker wrote:
>> >> 
>> >> 
>> >>> On Mar 3, 2021, at 3:54 PM, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> wrote:
>> >>> 
>> >>> Well this is a troubling response -- does anyone know if there's
>> >>> plans for tools.ietf.org? I would have thought that some thought
>> >>> would be given to this and maybe some announcement made to the
>> >>> IETF. Did I miss it??? Are we just destined to the whims of bit
>> >>> rot?
>> >> 
>> >> I think there was an announcement that Henrik was leaving, and I
>> >> certainly knew that there was a conflict between him and DMS/Glen's
>> >> work.
>> > 
>> > There has been no conflict between me and AMS/Glen, none at all.  There
>> > has been a great deal of conflict with the way the LLC Board and Jay
>> > has been running things and what they have put me through, and I'm deeply
>> > unhappy with them, but not at all with AMS or Glen.
>> > 
>> > The latest incident was with Jay at the beginning of February, after
>> > the end of my contract but at a time when I was still committed to
>> > maintaining tools.ietf.org as I have been doing it.  That February
>> > encounter did however completely zap my motivation for keeping
>> > tools.ietf.org up, and I now just want to be able to get completely
>> > away from it.
>> > 
>> > It used to give me great pleasure, thanks to the appreciation of all
>> > the good people in the IETF community, but now after the latest Jay
>> > incident it only reminds me of the pain of last year.
>> > 
>> > 
>> > Best regards,
>> > 
>> >       Henrik
>> > 
>> >> What might be nice wold be if people could somehow advise the
>> >> LLC that they use some specific tool, and would like to see it ported
>> >> into the AMS toolset. I would include the ability to subscribe to a
>> >> meeting calendar attached to or derived from derived from the IETF
>> >> Agenda. I use the "tools style" calendar and subscribe to it - in
>> >> large part because I keep all of my calendars in one tool and have
>> >> calendars that are unrelated to the IETF, so the ability to subscribe
>> >> to a calendar that lists a subset of the meetings at a given IETF
>> >> meeting is very useful to me.
>> >> 
>> >> For clarity, I am attaching what my calendar looks like fr the week
>> >> of IETF 110, and includes IETF meetings, ICANN's prep week for ICANN
>> >> 070, and some work in the ITU, in addition to personal events. If I
>> >> have a complaint in that, it is that ICANN and ITU don't seem to see
>> >> the value of subscribing to a calendar, but rather send out events -
>> >> when then become outdated as time goes on. I would not want IETF to
>> >> become deficient in that respect. 
>> > 
>>